It would take a braver man than me to tune in to this week’s Any Questions! The panel consists of Ben Bradshaw, Minister of State for Health, Andrew Lansley, Shadow Health Secretary, Don Foster, Liberal Democrat spokesman on Culture, Media and Sport and Dame Suzi Leather: Chair of Charity Commission. Anybody tune in? Have you recovered?
Yes unfortunately I did and it was a total liberal lefty fest including most of the audience! Luckily for the BBC it wasnt televised otherwise most people would see the bias and complain. What is the point of a ‘Question Time’ if they are all going to broadly agree with each other?
Poor BBC all those nasty bankers only part time BBC presenters should be allowed to make that much money. Now they have to big up the banks for the sake of our world saving daer leader.
Is dame Suzi the one he introduced as having been on 30 different bodies? well if she is how the hell has she any exprtise on any of them, 1 year and I know it all. She should be god.
I just turned off Question Time/Any Questions, whatever its called • discussing the current financial meltdown in UK. Dimbleby keeps interrupting, its complicated, Labour only keep repeating its global and Brown’s a saviour, Conservatives need to find a clear explanation that’s easy to understand, if they understand it themselves.
My view is there are three things happening instead of the usual one :
1. The usual cyclical downturn of the economy, plus
2. Financial instability only seen in the 1930’s when debt swaps (the source of the current crisis) were permitted
3. Heavy Labour borrowing during a prolonged period of international economic growth placing the public financial position in terrible shape going into a recession
This has happened because :
. financial regulators asleep at the switch (government)
. legislators in the USA and UK that allowed credit swaps – not all countries did
. then the usual greedy suspects – in this case the high paid corporates in financial institutions and credit agencies who are supposed to be regulated
How is it possible to have any sort of serious debate if all the panel members come from the same point of view. The upset this time was the BBC refusal to allow an appeal for Gaza relief on the grounds that it might infer that the BBC is biassed. W hat is deeply scary is that in this particular war reason plays no part. The BBC has been the perfect exemplar of the concept of power without responsibility. I think that they have done their bit of “new”s laundering in that they take stuff sent to them by Hamas in Gaza and then regurgitated it all as fact
I caught Any Answers!!! Grotesque- had to turn if off.
yes…and no!
A fine balance in these programmes. “Dame” Suzi Leather (sounds like a 70s rock goddess, no?) is a member of the Labour Party:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzi_Leather
However else she is ‘qualified’ for the endless number of committees and commisions she has briefly chaired is a mystery to me.
Bradshaw is a complete prat, like Suzi Know-It-All he’s been at 25 different ministries and proved useless at all of them.
As an aside Suzi’s CV is a perfect exmple of public sector networking. After ten-odd years as a “consumer consultant” (marketing bullshitter)she managed to blag her way into the NHS as Chair of a hospital trust, with absolutely no track record in Healthcare provision. Probably spun them a line about “patients as consumers”
From there you get known and network with other chairs and the Dept of Health, and so walks into the Embroyology & Fetilisation quango. Once you are known in quangocracy your name turns up easily on shortlists for other quangos. And then the Charity Industry.
Barbara Stocking – an equally riveting name as much as Dame Leather, went from Head of a Regional Health Authority to Head of Oxfam.
“Seamless” movement around the public sector charities and ngo’s. And you thought there was a glass ceiling?
AndrewSouthLondon: you have perfectly nailed what a fraud “Dame” Suzi is. Qualified as a social worker but never seems to have done a real job in her life, yet impeccably connected with the ruling oligarchy as a Labour Party member, and now endowed with (literal) god-like powers: deciding who shall be born and who shall not.
and handsomely paid no doubt, from the public purse. Why isn’t she a governor of the BBC?
When I was a young lad – many, many years ago – there was a thing called ‘The Establishment’. It consisted of crusty old judges, retired military men and the like. The young railed against this construction – having sit-ins and marching around Grosvenor Square (I can still remember watching the Vietnam riots, organised by that POS, Tariq Ali). There was a basic presumption amongst the young hotheads and revolutionaries that ‘The Establishment’ was wrong-headed, reactionary and past its sell-by date and needed to change.
Well, now there’s still an ‘Establishment’, but it consists of those very people who were complaining and subverting, all those years ago. It’s still made up of judges – but not the ‘flog and hang ’em’ variety, instead the ‘forgive all transgressions because of the inequalities and poverty of society’ – but it also includes a grotesque and perverted coterie of Labour politicians and hangers-on. Just like what came before, it consists of people who believe they know better than anyone else and have the right to determine what we do, say – even think. As the song goes, “Meet the new boss/Same as the old boss”.
The difference between the New Boss and the Old Boss is that the previous incumbents in The Establishment knew what they were talking about. They had had proper jobs and careers where they had to acquire and use real skills; the new lot are a bunch of ill-informed parasites with no track-record in anything worth anything. I can only despise them
drummermanpaul:
hear, hear!
POS = ? Poseur and old shit?
Which song was that, then?
.
‘Won’t get fooled again’ by The Who.
I read an interview with Roger Daltrey where he said the song was aimed at the radical left who wanted to use the band as a propaganda vehicle. It was their way of telling the reds to sod off.
So it’s a very appropiate quotation by drummermanpaul.
There is a serious problem facing this country – how to rid ourselves of the zombie-like legions of “Dame” Suzis and all the other ZaNuLabour placemen who, completely unelected, have taken over huge swathes of this country’s hidden administration.
You can find them on everything from employment tribunals to regional and local NHS bodies and, as libertus and AndrewSoutrhLondon point out, they float seamlessly from overpaid sinecure to overpaid sinecure in the NGO and fake charity sector.
Shaking these vermin off the public teat when we finally free ourselves from McBean and his corrupt cronies is going to take some effort but unless it is done, whoever wins the next election, it will be ZNL and its fellow travellers who hang on to the real power.
Nicely put, drummermanpaul!
Ben Bradshaw, Minister of State for Health
Only New Labour could make an openly practising homosexual a Health Minister. Speaks volumes. Perhaps they’ll make Abu Hamza head of MI5. If they’re still in power when Ian Huntley’s released, they could make him head of Children and Families.
There is a serious problem facing this country – how to rid ourselves of the zombie-like legions of “Dame” Suzis and all the other ZaNuLabour placemen who, completely unelected, have taken over huge swathes of this country’s hidden administration.
Oh I couldn’t agree more. That’s the poison in the soup. The politicisation and ideologisation of the public sector – you’re going to need colossal reform.
Take “Dame” “Suzi” Leather, who as head of the HFEA stated that children didn’t need fathers and promoted homosexual parenting – in fact, she said the role of the HFEA was to facilitate everything rather than to stop anything,
These cretins are the sharks, and their swimming pool is our country. In a sane society they would be cleaning the floors, and I mean no insult to the decent, hard working cleaners of Great Britain when I say that.
Rid of them we must, but they are well protected by “employment law” – getting rid of Chief Executives and directors in the public sector, other than for gross misconduct, is usually accomanied by a £300,000 pay off, and an open door to come back as a “consultant” (sidestepping the termination / re-employment condition of the pay off)
Well, as one of the voters in Bradshaw’s constituency, I’ll be doing my bit at the next election to get rid of him!
although, Hugh Oxford- What is the problem with a homosexual man as a minister? I don’t disagree that he’s incompetent, but that’s not due to his homosexuality…
Susan Franklin | 24.01.09 – 2:05 pm
You have left off your list the real people to blame – the Clinton administration which blackmailed banks into lending mortgage money to people who couldn’t afford to repay it long term.
Only New Labour could make an openly practising homosexual a Health Minister
What a dumb little shit you are.
Dont forget the legions of senior civil servants at Whitehall that need culling as well.
What a dumb little shit you are.
Not really.
If Mr Bradshaw was a closet homosexual or kept the matter private there would be no question of hypocrisy.
But you cannot support the gay agenda, which normalises the destruction of sexual morality, and practise homosexuality, which is an extraordinarily dangerous lifestyle from a health perspective, and claim to be in support of health.
It is people like Mr Bradshaw and the ideologies they espouse which have led to this country sporting horrendous rates of morbidity.
Mr Bradshaw is yet another shark in charge of yet another swimming pool.
terri 11.28
Yes. I haven’t heard BBC mention it (or any other broadcast media). They will protect the Democrats and blame everything on Bush.
“13 November 1999
WASHINGTON _ President Clinton predicted “a fundamental and historic change” in the U.S. financial system Friday as he signed into law legislation tearing down legal walls that have separated banks, stock brokerages and insurance companies since the Depression.
The new regulatory system opens the way to a freewheeling competition in American finance and removes most of the remaining impediments to the spreading growth of giant financial conglomerates that conduct business across traditional industry lines.
At the level most visible to consumers, the ongoing transformation of financial institutions into one-stop financial supermarkets should now accelerate.
But at the signing ceremony Friday, Clinton concentrated on the possible economic impact of a financial sector freed from many of its old regulatory strictures.”
Those partial to the pink sausage are said to amount to 10% of the population, and I think a minister for health of that persuasion might be a good thing, if he redress the outrageous imbalance in NHS attention given to womens health problems at the expense of those of men. Plenty of resources for breast and cervical cancer screening but little for prostate cancer screening. But of course he won’t.
AndrewSouthLondon | 25.01.09 – 5:11 pm |
Those partial to the pink sausage are said to amount to 10% of the population
Possibly true.
I suspect yer man Hugh Oxford thinks that gay men are at risk of aids and STDs.
Which they are – if they go out tomming any passing trade.
But which they’re not, if they stick faithfully to their civil partner.
He’d be on firmer ground wondering whether BB’s pep talks to NHS staff, encouraging the use of spirigel against MRSA, C. Diff etc. wouldn’t carry more weight if it weren’t for the thought in the back of his audience’s minds that he afterwards he might just have his fist up……well, you know.
Born in Uganda, the daughter of a psychosexual counsellor, she and her family came back to Britain where she studied politics at Exeter University, and later trained in probation and social work. She describes herself as a Christian Socialist, and has been a committed member of the Labour Party.
She chaired a Constituency Labour Party
Blatant anti-homosexual remarks only discredit this blog in the eyes of the BBC. They and many of their supporters will dismiss anything said here by anyone, simply because of occasional anti-homosexual remarks which aren’t shouted down by the majority of commenters. That’s not really fair, of course, but neither is the BBC.
Criticizing the toilet trade and bathhouse lifestyle is one thing, but flat out anti-homosexual comments aren’t helpful.
I’m saying this based not just on a few tut-tuts from defenders of the indefensible, but because a few months back a BBC News Online employee popped in here to tell us that they think this place is usually beneath contempt because not enough people condemn anti-homosexual remarks.
Any B-BBC book will be instantly trashed and dismissed because of things like that.
David: we (or at least I) don’t care in the slightest that the BBC might react to comments on this blog in a “holier than thou” manner. If they can’t see the irony in their support for the most anti-homosexual regime on earth they deserve even less respect.
It would take a braver man than me to tune in to this week’s Any Questions!
Good to see you are finally taking my advice and going Cold Turkey on the BBC.
The trick is to not stop now and try your best to keep up the hard work.
Remember simply leave the mind control device alone for at least a month and you will start to see truly positive results.
Possibly for the first time ever, you will start to actually regain some of your natural abilities to think for yourself. Better still regain the ability with out the confusion of constant BBC and MSM disinformation and contrived diversions, which leads to metal overload.
Better known as the tried and tested “can not see the gigantic fascist communist rain forest for all the millions of MSM created red herring type trees” method of mind control.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
It is a very big world out there in some respects, and a lot of very interesting things happen in it every hour of every day.
However the now extremely busy human mind can only cope with a very small input of information from it.
The BBC know this. They also know that the 10 to 30 mins a day that the public spends paying attention to the news, is only really about 60 seconds REALLY paying attention.
Therefore what the BBC inflicts on the great mass of people in that 60 seconds is EXTREMELY important when it comes to mind control and of course well and truly setting the political agenda, and therefore completely controlling election results, as well as your mind. This even when the wheels of the economy have been seen to have well and truly fallen off, by even the most blinkered of Labour voters.
The reason for this is simple. By the BBC and therefore the establishment controlling the radical side, controlling the reactionary side is relatively easy. The establishment KNOW exactly how the common people will react to given situations. They know, because they create almost all given situations, and have been studying and recording the reactions for thousands of years.
This is OBVIOUSLY the total end of the Labour Party as a credible party of government for the rest of eternity.
However the BBC top brass cares not anymore. IMO it knows that one day in the not so distant future, there will no longer be a British Parliament or a sovereign British nation, for the Labour Party to be a part of.
The BBC however will go on forever, whatever happens and by whatever manner it is payed for, and it collectively knows this to be the case.
I contend that the BBC has the wits and power to get a Conservative government elected, every bit as much as it always gets Labour ones elected. The only difference is that the BBC do not have to lie anywhere close to as much as they do to get a Labour government elected. Or indeed do anything at all to get a Conservative government elected to office. All they really have to do is let The red team bankrupt the country then stop slagging off the Blue team for a few weeks leading up to a general election.
When the BBC does so, this usually leads to a Blue team landslide of record proportions, faced of course by the inevitable utter financial chaos of the previous Red team administration.
The net result so far being, where we are today, and where we are most surly going.
David, like Robert, I don’t give a monkey’s toss what the BBC thinks or says.
In fact, if they trash/dismiss any B-BBC books, it will only improve sales.
This blog is supposed to be about standing up to BBC bias and propaganda – and I certainly don’t think you, or anyone else commenting on this blog, should make an exception or be shouted down when it comes to the BBC’s pro-homosexuality agenda.
Personally I am sickened that the BBC trying to ram their pro-homosexuality agenda down our throats at every possible opportunity.
The BBC somehow thinks it has the right to dictate its “modern” moral /social agenda to the rest of us lesser beings – and that anyone who disagrees with them can legitimately be shouted down and coerced into a politically correct silence.
As far as I’m concerned, the BBC’s “high priests” can shove their moral agenda up the favorite part of their anatomy!
There’s a chapter on “Dame” Suzi in Quentin Letts’ recent book, “50 People who Buggered up Britain”.
Highly recommended.
But you cannot support the gay agenda, which normalises the destruction of sexual morality, and practise homosexuality, which is an extraordinarily dangerous lifestyle from a health perspective, and claim to be in support of health.
You are as ignorant as you are bigoted.
It is people like Mr Bradshaw and the ideologies they espouse which have led to this country sporting horrendous rates of morbidity
Ignorant drivel.
You could have been a columnist for the Stuermer: “Those dirty Jews have led to the horrendous rise in infectious diseases in this otherwise hygienic Germany of ours”.
You are one disgusting little shit.
.